For a look at a cop killed by a whacko please go to this thread. Be sure to read the last replies about the killer and how he bragged about it online at a site in San Francisco: (Young police officer gunned down by cop hater in Red Bluff, Kali.)
Yeh, another great Supreme Court decision.(sarcasm)
The demand that all interrogations be videotaped, is based on the knowledge that many jurors -- especially urban blacks -- will find such practices repugnant, and use them as a pretext for acquitting guilty defendants.
Awwww, poor coppers. You mean they have to follow laws too?? Say it aint so.
A videotaping requirement would also bog down manpower and money in the procuring, taping, cataloguing and storing of videotapes,
Yeh, cameras are soooooooo expensive and cataloging them is such a chore. I mean, justice just isn't worth the hassle.
and cause detectives to censor themselves during interrogations, thus compromising their effectiveness.
LOL!!! A cop is afraid to say or do something on camera, and that is a bad thing?? Are you telling me a cop would hold back on 100% legal methods because he/she is being taped? Get real.
As one prosecutor said, videotaping would make it impossible to get convictions via confessions -- which is the point.
One prosecuter covering for the others. Videotaping would make sure everyone is telling the truth about the interogation.
Further, amid specious claims of "coerced confessions,...."
Hmmm, claims of coerced confessions are "specious"? Yep, no truth to any of them, I'm sure.
the requirement that all future interrogations be videotaped would be used, ex post facto, to re-open the cases of the justly convicted, in order to get new trials with suppressed confessions, which would lead to many of America's most vicious criminals being released to rape and murder again.
Yep, there you have it folks! If interogations were taped, then no criminal could ever get convicted! Society would collapse if police had to carry this "heavy burden". LOL!!!
Some of the author's points are valid, but he is off his rocker here and sounds just like all the "law and order apologists".
Sorry, I'll offer something more thoughtful when I'm home and can read this more thoroughly.
Without a doubt there are kernels of truth buried in these arguements. However, there are enough real examples of cops behaving badly to justify the attention aimed at them.
The part about black jurors refusing to convict black defendants is a real enough issue. It's also a cultural problem and has little to do with any perceived "war on cops". What's the proposed solution, an outright constitutional ban on jury nullifcation? If so, I'd rather let every black defendant walk than give up the right to trial by a jury of my peers BY A JURY WITH THE POWER TO VOTE THEIR CONSCIENCE.
I don't think cops deserve special treatment. But I think it is in our best interests if existing laws that protect all citizens were enforced when they were violated against the persons of cops. Once they realize that no one is backing them up, they will either go bad on us or give up, neither of which is a pleasant scenario.
Civil liberties are hugely important, but there has to be some allowance made for situational realities that exist in the inner city. That allowance is *NOT* to give cops even more privileges, but to make carrying concealed firearms a reality for all law-abiding citizens, one that will not result in punishment for self-defense.
Videotaping sounds like a good idea. I think most people are predisposed to accept some degree of sleight of hand on the part of interrogators (within reason of course), because that is how interrogations have been portrayed on TV and in Hollywood for decades. The only reasons a jury would find such behavior reprehensible and worthy of acquittal per se would be if 1) it *was* that bad 2)they were going to acquit the guy anyway and needed an excuse (card-carrying democrats, perhaps).
I think, Poohbah, some latitude should be permitted within interrogations, and I think it is a fairly clear line between subterfuge and coercion. The accused have many recourses that are the counterpoint of such subterfuge, especially summoning a lawyer, the 5th amendment, due process...
On an aside, there was some government bigwig visiting the business school building of my university today, I don't know which bigwig but the guy who built the school (Huntsman) has such luminaries as Dick Cheney on his list of personal friends, so I can imagine. Anyway, when I went to park my bicycle out in front, I was summarily ordered to leave by some suit and his jackbooted (literally) police associate. No "Excuse me sir, but could you move your bike elsewhere" but rather a peremptory "Get out of here". Some long repressed hatred of authority welled up within me; I wanted to ask the trooper if he got his outfit at the Gestapo Surplus. But I moved quietly. Then as I went to meet with a professor there some bodyguard/secret service type guy dominating the hallway. Since when people stare at me I am wont to stare back, I was the focus of his attention. I know they were just doing their jobs, but I hate being treated like a criminal when I am so obviously just going about my business. Perhaps that is why my usual general affection for policemen is not there today...I dunno.
Dangerous ground, that. Folks might infer the potential existence of Conscience.